ShareThis Page

Increased bus traffic baffles Scott residents, officials

Megan Guza
| Wednesday, Oct. 16, 2013, 9:01 p.m.

Scott residents voiced their frustration over Port Authority bus traffic on neighborhood streets to township commissioners at a workshop meeting last week.

Residents from Orchard Spring Road said the number of buses that use the street is dangerous.

“I don't like it, and you shouldn't either,” Mary Lou Blasko told commissioners. She said 60 buses go past her house daily.

Port Authority spokesman Jim Ritchie said the route always has gone the length of Orchard Spring, but the frequency of service during certain times of the day has changed.

“There are more buses today than, say, five years ago on that street,” he said. Ritchie said the frequency of service there increased because of a system-wide change.

“We've really gotten away from having variance — having one route go to different destinations,” he said. “It was confusing for riders and it cost money, so we did away with most of those. That's when the frequency change happened and why.”

Orchard Spring resident Barbara Hopkins said the increase in bus traffic has happened within the past year.

“If they can prove the ridership is there, then OK,” she said. “But this is ridiculous.”

Ritchie said that if Port Authority pulls service from the Orchard Spring neighborhood and has its 38 Route go down Greentree Road, riders will have to walk up to Greentree Road to get to their bus stops.

“Then we run the risk of potentially angering another group of people, and then we'd be dealing with that,” he said.

He said Port Authority is looking for guidance from Scott officials.

Commissioner Bill Wells said it is a subject he fears broaching with Port Authority for fear of losing some routes — or all of them.

“I'm afraid to touch it,” he said. “We don't want to lose bus routes in any part of the township.”

Megan Guza is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. She can be reached at 412-388-5810 or

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.